Model comparison
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.7 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen2.5 32B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads 24.9 to 17.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 46.1% for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct and 35.5% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
Side by side
| Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 29.7 | 28.6 |
| Released | 2024-09 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 131K |
| Max output | 8K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.70 | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.80 | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.1 (#165), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.3% | 46.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 18.5 (#262), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 128.52 | 118.44 |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
Math Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 15.3 (#289), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.4% | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.1% | — |
Knowledge Qwen2.5 32B Instruct leads
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#259), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 46.1% | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)
| Benchmark | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 29.7 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen2.5 32B Instruct's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is Qwen2.5 32B Instruct or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 32B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 131K tokens.
How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 32B Instruct and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.